News, politics, insights, inside information from the left

Main Menu

Tory right welcomes 31 October delay as step toward Xmas coup

Tory right is playing for time until December – when another attempt can be made to topple May

Theresa May’s humiliation – entirely unsurprisingly – has continued, as she was forced to accept a Brexit delay until 31 October after asking the EU to give her until 30 June.

EU leaders had wanted a year’s extension – and will get one – but appear to be prepared to do so in phases. They know they have the upper hand over a dire May and can afford to take their time.

The SKWAWKBOX revealed yesterday that the plan of many of the Conservatives’ hardest Brexiteers now includes a long Brexit delay – to at least December. While their public display may still include shows of outrage and cries of betrayal, in many cases this will be pure theatre for their supporters.

In reality, they now don’t want Brexit to be completed until they’ve had another chance to topple May – and under Tory rules no further no-confidence attempt can be made until December, twelve months after May survived the last one.

Any successful leadership candidate would need to win the support of what remains of the Tory party’s membership, which overwhelmingly prefers a no-deal exit – and a successful coup would quickly be followed by a hard Brexit triggered by a right-wing leader.

A new referendum is not only unachievable but would make matters worse – deepening division and hardening attitudes among a public that largely just wants the dreary saga finished.

The UK’s hopes of avoiding such a dismal outcome therefore rest on Jeremy Corbyn’s chance of manoeuvring May into accepting a customs union as part of a revised Brexit package – ideally before the fiasco of the UK participating in rushed elections to the European Parliament that would strengthen an extreme right expecting to perform well on the back of a frustrated-Brexiteer protest vote.

The EU has made it clear that it would welcome such a deal with open arms – but does Theresa May have the sense and backbone to accept Corbyn’s offer?

The SKWAWKBOX needs your support. This blog is provided free of charge but depends on the generosity of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal orhere for a monthly donation via GoCardless. Thanks for your solidarity so this blog can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.

If you wish to reblog this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.

“The UK’s hopes of avoiding such a dismal outcome therefore rest on Jeremy Corbyn’s chance of manoeuvring May into accepting a customs union as part of a revised Brexit package”

I’m OK with that as long as there is rock solid commitment to put any deal back to the people of this country for ratification. It’s our future and we should be the ones to decide.

A quote from our conference motion.“If we cannot get a general election Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote. If the Government is confident in negotiating a deal that working people, our economy and communities will benefit from they should not be afraid to put that deal to the public.

However the first option is Corbyns Brexit deal or a soft Brexit that he can agree to. I do not agree with your interpretation that a 2nd referendum is the prefered option and personally I think it would be a disaster.

Leavers confident their judgement had been sound would say “Yeah? Bring it on, suckers. We’ll just vote leave again and we’ll win bigger this time.”
Instead they say “Don’t you dare even suggest another vote, you anti-democratic Fascist rapist monster.”
Because they all know they nicked the win on a fluke – a handball goal the ref didn’t see.

Steve, I’m just glad that I seem to have got away with it.
That was the sum total of my 60 years of football-watching knowledge – gleaned a couple of seconds at a time when the remote was out of reach.

What I can say to you is that I voted remain, but would definitely vote out next time. Look what is happening inside Europe and the legislation the political class have passed without our knowledge and perhaps even you might think again.

Absolutely, yes, a GE is the ONLY way out of this abominable mess. I find myself impatient for Corbyn to call the vote of no confidence in the Tory government that this country needs like the lancing of a pus-filled boil. However, timing is all. Corbyn needs to show himself to have a mastery of political strategy that May so obviously lacks. This time round he must be successful.

A second referendum would be at best a diversion and at worst a launching pad for the likes of Nigel Farage, his Brexit Party and other forces even further to the right. Socialists and other progressives should not be seduced by the prospects of a new referendum, particularly as the ‘choice’ would no doubt be between ‘no deal’ and May’s deal. This prospect reminds me of a sage, if rather crude comment made about the contest over the pond a few years ago between Trump and Clinton, namely, “… it’s just a question of how much piss you want on your chips”.

It is now abundantly clear, even to members of her own party, on both ‘wings’ that May is signally unfit to rule for even one day more. The Labour ‘deal’ is the only game in town, and they know it. How much longer will they tolerate her intransigence and inflexibility? Only a people’s vote can break the deadlock, but not the one on Brexit but the one on which party manifesto, and which political future the country will have as its stands on the cusp of the third decade of the 21st century.

A GE must happen soon – certainly by the autumn. We need a long extension to Brexit in order to get a good deal, hopefully brokered by an incoming Labour government with Corbyn as PM. But those who fear a ‘palace coup’ by Rees-Mogg and co. should May still be clinging to office in December are right. This must be pre-empted by her imminent departure. and that of the Tory government.

Neoliberal EU legislation – such as the liberalisation directives which guarantee privatisation in rail, mail, gas, electricity, telecommunications – can only be repealed by unanimity in the Council of the EU.

Neoliberal provisions of the Treaties such as freedom of corporate establishment, free movement of capital and veto power on state aid, can only be repealed by “common accord” (all must support: abstention counts as vote against) of the MSs.

Main point of the EU is (and always was) to entrench and protect the lovely capitalist system.

Danny, maybe you’re right… maybe it will take cars burning in the streets before they repeal neoliberalism.
But there will be change. We’re on the brink of joblessness so vast the neo’s will cede control of everything hoping to avoid destruction by the angry mob.

The point is that ‘neoliberalism’ dominates *world* trade – it’s not an EU invention, nor is the EU the prime mover.

As many of us have previously pointed out, the more extreme examples of ‘neoliberal’ policy within the UK have been entirely home-grown, not EU-controlled. It wasn’t the EU that sold off our family silver. And it’s no coincidence that it’s the extreme right that has been the instigator of Brexit : they see the EU actually as a brake on their Ayan Rand inspired project.

A massive issue that Lexiteers duck is that the framework for future trade deals will be an extreme neoliberal framework; the UK will not be in a position to moderate this. In fact it will be – as has been previously said – a ‘rule taker’, bound by exactly the same objectives in negotiations, but without the clout of the EU, and it will have given up any part in shaping the policies.

That is a major aspect of the ‘Remain’ perspective – not a blind allegiance to EU constraints as they are.

RH, not too many outside the US hold up Ayn Rand as the god of neoliberalism – most around here cite Hayek.
She was more than a bit woolly in her thinking and a bit Lundiel in her attacks on other pretenders to that title. ‘Reality’ as one of your four philosophical pillars and ‘capitalism’ as another for fuck’s sake.
Shame the other two, ‘reason’ and ‘self-interest’, mean the same as the first two – and when every word is in defence of capitalism she was clearly a deeply troubled woman with only one thing on her mind – the destruction of the USSR.
Her birth name and birthplace can hardly be unrelated to her obsession.
Least objective objectivist ever.
And now I’m irritated at having to renew my acquaintance with something I threw down in disgust nearly 50 years ago.

David – I reckon Rand is more a symbolic figure than a philosopher or economist. She gave imaginative form to the extreme neoliberal fantasies that beset us.

… but I don’t pretend to a detailed knowledge of her writing. I have enough attacks of sickness without inducing more. I note that Javid claimed to be a devotee … which is enough for me to cite her as a representative of the loopy right wing self-ggrandisement tendency.

Of course, the current fury against parliament is a displacement for the intractability of the population at large – because the deadlock – despite the whining – accurately reflects the outcome (not ‘result’) of the referendum.

… which was a clear split and no decisive vote for Brexit.

That’s why – despite clear disadvantages – a properly structured re-run is the only way forward.